Disputatio:Citizen Kane

Cane vel Kane?

I'm worried about "Civis Cane". First, the surname should be "Kane" as in the original. Second, the word order should be "Kane civis". But I'm almost sure Cicero would have preferred the pattern Kane, civis insignis. --Neander 22:53, 19 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

This page was originally "Civis Kane" but I was told to move it here. Actually now that I reread Vicipaedia:Translatio nominum propriorum it probably should be "Civis Kane", and unfortunately I believe the old Disputatio page got deleted. As for the word order, I am not knowledgeable enough to have an opinion on that, but I do not think that the word inignis should be in the title, as the word Citizen is supposed to be a little ironic and the famous part is supposed to be implied by the movie, not the title. But I don't want to get into deep character discussions. Anyone else have an opinion? -- Secundus Zephyrus 14:27, 20 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

If 'Mount Aetna' is regularly Aetna Mons and 'King George' is regularly Georgius Rex, then shouldn't 'Citizen Kane' be Kane Civis? IacobusAmor 14:39, 20 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

Pro primo, in Latin, substantive attribute generally follows its head; accordingly, "Kane Civis". Pro secundo, in idiomatic Latin´, "the wise Socrates" is Socrates, vir sapiens rather than "Socrates sapiens". Pro tertio, the adjective "insignis" is so-called vox media which can be interpreted both in bonam partem and in malam partem; hence, Kane, civis insignis is wide open to irony. While I understand the point that irony should be revealed not by the title but by the movie, we ought also to pay heed to the exigencies of the syntactic mechanisms of Latin, methinks. --Neander 03:07, 21 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

Yes to all that, except that the pattern of Citizen Kane may be evoking the familiar pattern where the noun citizen is a term of reference (like mons in Aetna Mons)—heard, for example, in Citoyen Robespierre, which might well be translated as Robespierre Civis, with no need of an adjective parallel to the cited sapiens and insignis. Something similar may be happening in Russian, e.g. Tovarich Lenin 'Comrade Lenin'. Or even in English with brother, sister, and such. If the title of the movie were Brother Kane, wouldn't we translate that as Kane Frater? That's the pattern as I hear it, not a pattern that wants an adjective as in Socrates, vir sapiens. IacobusAmor 03:50, 21 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

It sounds to me like it should be "Kane, civis insignis"; though correct "Kane civis" sounds lame.--Rafaelgarcia 04:07, 21 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

Iacobe, your points are very well-taken, and I'm almost ready to take back my "Kane, civis insignis". I don't know what it is, but somehow "Kane civis" sounds lame in my ears as well. Perhaps I'm so well-fed on the pattern civis + ethnonym. While Cicero consul is fine, Cicero civis ... well, I dunno. But while writing this, I ran across nam in Samo nihil nobilius quam Pythagoras civis, qui ... Italiam advectus est (Solinus 11, 31). Maybe this is the swallow that makes the summer. --Neander 21:57, 21 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

Name

Shouldn't the page rather be called Citizen Kane followed by the parenthetical Latin translation? --BiT 18:02, 12 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's the way we do it for books. Why we treat films differently I'm not sure. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:48, 12 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

All right with me. --Neander 22:06, 12 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

I feel kind of bad suggesting this since there's obviously been a lot of discussion going on concerning the Latin name so the people who worked on it surely want it to be prominently displayed --BiT 03:28, 13 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

Well I asked this same question a few months ago...I was told was that films fall under category 3 under Libri et arte facta...that since it is not a written work, it should be translated. I personally disagree. Films start with scripts, which are certainly written. I think it should be Citizen Kane. --SECUNDUS ZEPHYRUS 05:29, 13 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

I would certainly support you -- remembering that, when films really are translated, they often are not given the title one first thinks of: it doesn't sound right in the new language. I have a feeling some of our film titles don't sound right in Latin! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:10, 13 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

When I wrote rule 3, I worded it poorly. There is nothing magical that should separate a written work from an oral work in how its title should be treated, and the strict adherence to the letter destroys the spirit in which it was offered. I'm rewriting it now. —Mucius Tever 17:28, 14 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

Translations of titles are rarely translated verbatim. In my opinion when so done it tends to be albeit grammatically correct- wrong, too long to pronounce and not as witty as it sounds in the original language or simply out of place. This is of course a problem here since not many people have a good feel for Latin (not as a mother tongue) so it is to be expected that some translations sound odd I guess. Me thinks the best solution would be to name the article Citizen Kane adding the verbatim translation in parenthesis as such;

• Citizen Kane (Anglice: Kane civis) ... --BiT 02:58, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

According to the style of Vicipaedia, a colon after "Anglice" would mean that "Kane civis" is how the lemma is said in English. I believe the following style has precedents in Vicipaedia:

• Citizen Kane (Anglice, 'Kane Civis'). . . .

The comma means that the lemma is in English, and the single quotes mean that in our language (hehe) it's "Kane Civis." Punctuation marks do convey meaning! IacobusAmor 03:39, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)

I've moved it: was that right? Iacobus may well change my double quotes to single quotes ... but, after looking carefully at his last paragraph, perhaps he won't after all :)

The form of words I've used at the beginning is one I've used elsewhere in explaining the titles of books: it's slightly more explicit than just saying Anglice, which (I thought) might look paradoxical. But please comment or correct. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:52, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)